Mumbai, January 21, 2022 – The Sessions Court for Greater Bombay has granted bail to Nisar Rafik Ahmed Khan, a rickshaw driver accused of assaulting a bus driver. Additional Sessions Judge M.G. Deshpande, presiding over Court Room No. 16, allowed the bail application (Bail Application No. 102 of 2022), citing the lengthy period of incarceration and the nature of the offenses.

Khan was arrested in connection with C.R. No. 327/2021, registered at BKC Police Station, under sections 353 (assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty), 332 (voluntarily causing hurt to deter public servant from his duty),¹ 341 (wrongful restraint), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt),² 427 (mischief causing damage to the amount of fifty rupees), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace), and 506 (punishment for criminal intimidation) of³ the Indian Penal Code⁴ (IPC).

The Allegations and Arrest:

According to the complainant, a bus driver, on October 13, 2021, while driving his bus on route number 181, a rickshaw driven by Khan abruptly came in front of the bus and was parked across the bus, obstructing its path. Khan then boarded the bus, abused and assaulted the bus driver. When the bus conductor and another bus driver tried to intervene, Khan allegedly pelted stones at the bus, breaking the front windshield. Khan was apprehended and taken to the police station.

Defense Arguments:

Khan, through his advocate Sharif Shaikh (represented by Ms. Kritika Agarwal), applied for bail.

Prosecution’s Objections:

The prosecution, represented by Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Rashmi Tendulkar, strongly opposed the bail application. They argued that there was a possibility of Khan repeating the crime and that he would pressurize the complainant and prosecution witnesses if released on bail.

Court’s Analysis and Decision:

Judge Deshpande, after hearing arguments and reviewing the record, made the following observations:

• Lengthy Incarceration: The court noted that Khan had been in jail since his arrest on October 13, 2021.
• Nature of Offenses: The court considered the nature of the offenses, particularly Section 353 of the IPC, which carries a maximum punishment of five years.
• Uncertainty of Trial: The court acknowledged the uncertainty of when the trial would commence and conclude.
• Recovery of Stone: The court noted that the stone used in the alleged offense had already been recovered.
• Breadwinner of Family: The court considered that Khan was the breadwinner of his family.

Judge Deshpande concluded that keeping Khan in jail for an indefinite period was not justified, given the nature of the offenses and the maximum punishment prescribed. He found that Khan had made out a strong prima facie case for bail.

Conditions of Bail:

The court granted Khan bail on the following conditions:

• He must furnish a Personal Recognizance (PR) bond of ₹15,000 with a surety of the same amount.
• He must undertake not to abscond and to attend all court hearings.
• He must undertake not to pressurize or threaten the complainant and prosecution witnesses.
• He must not leave Mumbai without prior permission from the Trial Court.
• He must be released on provisional cash security of ₹15,000 for four weeks and abide by the other conditions.
• Bail must be furnished before the Learned Court of First Instance.

Significance of the Order:

This order highlights the court’s emphasis on:

• Length of Incarceration: The court considered the length of time the accused had already spent in custody.
• Nature of Offenses and Punishment: The court assessed the severity of the offenses and the maximum punishment prescribed.
• Uncertainty of Trial: The court acknowledged the delays in the judicial process.
• Personal Circumstances: The court considered the accused’s personal circumstances as the breadwinner of his family.
• Conditions to Ensure Compliance: The court imposed conditions to ensure the accused’s presence during the trial and prevent any interference with the investigation.

This ruling underscores the court’s approach in balancing the rights of the accused with the interests of justice, particularly when considering bail applications.